Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council is dealing with reported anti-social behaviour at his housing block and about its refusal to install internal CCTV cameras. This is because one element of the complaint is out of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about how the Council is dealing with reported anti-social behaviour at his housing block and its refusal to install internal CCTV cameras.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council provided Mr X with temporary accommodation within a housing block Mr X says he experiences anti-social behaviour (ASB) and is unhappy with the action taken by the Council to deal with the ASB reported.
7. Mr X is also unhappy that the Council has only installed external CCTV cameras and considers this to be inadequate to address the ASB issues. He wants the Council to install cameras within the internal communal areas.
8. We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaints about the Council’s decision not to install any internal CCTV cameras. This is because I am satisfied installation of CCTV cameras would fall under the Council’s responsibilities as a social landlord as it is related to the management or running of social housing.
9. In response to our enquiries, the Council confirmed it had opened an ASB case in relation to the reports of ASB within the housing block. The Council detailed it had sent warning letters to the person responsible for the ASB and secured a partial closure order. The Council said the case remains open and it is working with the police to decide what further action to take.
10. An investigation is not justified we are not likely to find fault with the Council. The Council is aware of its powers to take action to deal with ASB and has demonstrated its willingness to use these powers. It is not the Ombudsman’s role to tell the Council how it should tackle the ASB issues. The role of the Ombudsman is to review how the Council is dealing with the issues. In this case, there is no evidence of fault with the way the Council has considered the issues and the action it has taken.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because one element of the complaint is out of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman